Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Apr 29, 2012 9:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

I have very often noticed in my audio edits, based on the edit lines I create, certain patterns that reflect "ease ins" and "ease outs," so I think I've managed to accomplish something in terms of handling non-linear anomalies - it's very similar to keyframing, but it looks more like a "connect the dots" line than an automated curved line that certain keyframes would create. In any case, since we view images nowadays that are essentially composed of squares (pixels), yet look incredibly smooth, I think the same can be accomplished with a "high-resolution" editing style, using linear patterns at a very short rate, that the human ear essentially cannot detect when blended with a pitch-corrected recording. That's why I like to call them Trix.

Anyways, you have inspired me to give 9/1/79 another shot - at a higher resolution........

peace

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Apr 29, 2012 10:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

Actually, now that I think about it more, my "connect the dots" line is really more of a curved line by virtue of how I respond to the rate of speed change that is happening between each dot, or "keyframe." In other words, the lines between the dots are actually more curved than straight because speed-change is ultimately happening in analogue recordings - which is why using analogue is so essential to this process, and why I'm so glad these things were put onto tape in the first place.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dead-head_Monte Date: Apr 29, 2012 2:17pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

By exactly measuring the sources, the exact speed differences become crystal clear to you. You are the speed-control animator. As you go down the tape, you will be witnessing what the trending is, by measuring all these speed differences. For example: a) fast, faster, and faster; b) slow, slower; and slower; c) faster, slower, then faster; d) slower, faster, then slower; e) cyclical speed-changing patterns; f) "once-around" errors; g) start-of-tape errors, then middle-of-tape is good, then end-of-tape errors.

For Samplitude Pro s/w, the pitch correction module needs to be integrated into the VIP mixing, mastering, and rendering module. This enables you to preview your pitch and speed shifts while you mix all your sources at the same time. Then you need a robust Keyframe Editor to create animation "fairings" that match the speed-errors exactly, including automation tools like these:

Easy Ease — Smooths both the keyframe’s incoming and outgoing interpolation
Easy Ease In — Smooths the keyframe’s incoming interpolation
Easy Ease Out — Smooths the keyframe’s outgoing interpolation

09fig80.jpg

Adding slight deceleration to soften or ease the speed into and out of keyframes is a commonly used technique. Adobe is applying Keyframe Assistants "apps" in After Effects. These are provided to automate the task of keyframe smoothing.

Animating on the Fly in Motion 4
S0710_AnimFly.png

A powerful feature that Motion offers is the ability to create animations while your project is playing back. This is similar to how audio engineers adjust sliders for each of their different audio channels while listening to the mix. The next time it is played back, all of those changes are incorporated.

Because so many of Motion’s effects are displayed in real time, you can perform a sort of “visual mix” and modify the various parameters of your effects while the project is playing back.

(Imagine seeing all the tape segments strung together in a Keyframe Editor. You're in the middle of a pitch-correction project. For the current song you are working on, now you can know whether each part is behaving as it should.)

With keyframing on the fly, you can make adjustments to any slider or parameter in the program while your project is playing. You can also interactively manipulate objects in the Canvas. Then, if you don’t like what you did, rewind and do it again. Each time you alter a parameter, you replace any keyframes previously assigned.

One of the most common uses for animating on the fly is to create handmade animation paths. Although you can choose from a variety of curve types, it is very difficult to get the semi-random movement except by sketching with your mouse or pen.

This is an animation (of motor-speeds) issue. Aircraft accident reconstruction animations address this. Forensic re-enactment animations used in courtrooms address this. Car accident reconstruction animations address this. Architectural Designer CAD s/w addresses this. They all use the same technology. Technicians, engineers, and scientists measure stuff with precision, and then they create computer animations that visualize exactly what they measured. This process is called Scientific Visualization. (The purpose of scientific visualization is to graphically illustrate scientific data to enable scientists to understand, illustrate, and glean insight from their data.) Doing a Matrix this way is like performing a Scientific Audio Rendering.



This post was modified by dead-head_Monte on 2012-04-29 21:17:59

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Apr 29, 2012 10:53am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

Got it. My only concern, when it comes to the subjective art of sound, is that super-scientific methods might overshadow an alternative, more enjoyable acoustical energy that can be achieved by way of the mix in tandem with the ACTUAL, MINUSCULE distance between the "present moment" of the SBD and the "present moment" of AUD, which I think is a balancing act from show to show, song to song. They should not be right on top of each other, and they should rub each other the right way, like in good sex. What I'm saying is that there should be room for "play" rather than some theory of sonic "perfection," and that mathematical calculations might create limitations - certainly they are not always the right ones for the task at hand. I can understand the need to apply these techniques to car accidents, but I would prefer much more caution with matrixes, which to me are an art form more so than a science. I don't like using targeting computers when going in for the kill - that's almost like cheating.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dead-head_Monte Date: Apr 29, 2012 11:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

The art here is purely scientific. Take primary colors, for example. The combination of any two exact primary colors creates an exact secondary color, every time. But, it takes a long time to mix colors and create a good painting. Translated: the combination of any AUD and SBD, pitched and synched exactly together - taped at the same show, creates an exact matrix, every time. But, it takes a long time to create and mix a good matrix.

The sound engineer knows that when mixing two exact sounds (frequencies) together, the result is always four exact frequencies. You will always have the two original frequencies, the sum frequency of the two, and the difference frequency between the two. Every time. For the AUD, you will ALSO have combinations of reflected and delayed sounds. On the SBD side, some instruments may be delayed differently than others, especially when using effects boxes. The P.A. system may also have sub-system arrays that are delayed differently from each other. Alembic did this with GD's sound system during the wall of sound era. AUD and SBD sources will mix differently into each matrix attempt.

Now it's an 'art' to get the matrix sounding the best.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Apr 29, 2012 2:03pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

Are you suggesting that the SBD and AUD need to match exactly, as in they need to be synced right on top of each other? I think the AUD should generally trail behind the SBD ever so slightly. This creates a more "complementary" sound, from my experience. This distancing, which is what I am getting at, is a creative, subjective choice, not a scientific one. What number do you choose for this distance? "3.41"? "3.75"? It's more subjective than one would like to think. On top of that, I think automated "ease ins" and "ease outs" will not match the other tape 100% perfectly - but it can come VERY close. There's always room for minuscule error when applying "samples" to something that is by nature "organic," even with our best instruments. There's always a bigger microscope. The beauty is, however, we can have a "just exactly perfect" sounding blend without it matching perfectly. It's a matter of: how close to the painting do you really need to get? You ultimately have to stand back from it to focus on the experience itself, not the "perfect" or "semi-perfect" brush strokes, which are more or less hidden from the human ear anyway, if done well.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Apr 29, 2012 2:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

On second thought, I suppose you could just sync it all on top of each other using the techniques you have described, and then just push the AUD back however far is desired, as one big piece. (But something tells me that might not work across the board.) So, yeah, the more technology to figure this stuff out the better. I guess we are in total agreement at this point. Great discussion!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dead-head_Monte Date: Apr 29, 2012 2:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

No, I'm not saying whether to use synch-offsets "for effect" or not. Synching two tapes will never be perfect for the whole show in a matrix project. But you can get close, like shooting fish in a barrel.

Matrixing and synching messed up tapes is extremely difficult. What if both sources are messed up? It is very time-consuming, including carpal-tunnel syndrome. I'm simply saying, you can get your ducks in a row, and have a life at the same time. Don't kill yourself, and don't humiliate yourself. Consider the science involved. If you do end up quitting this project, at least you'll be an expert at it.

What do you think of the "Bertha remaster" sound, like this Veneta show that Jay Ashley did? I like it! It's not a matrix, or synch-offset, but it's a DAW (digital audio workstation) production. Similar to the matrix controversy, some people like the Bertha sound, and some dislike it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Apr 29, 2012 3:07pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: For cosmiccharlie - Post retirement matrix sample...

Got it, makes sense. Use the best tools possible! If they really make it work better, then that's the way to go. Thanks for sharing all the info.

The Bertha's are tricky, because it's totally subjective. Some will like them, others won't. That's just how I feel about the Bertha's: I like some, others I don't so much.

Sometimes I like hearing the "classic" GD recording sound over a more "produced" sound - but man, sometimes that produced, "enhanced" sound just does it for me.